Bubba Ray Boudreaux
1 ton status
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>
Actually, I think it could be simplified, in that EFI adds fuel based on what a computer determines. Even with a computer carb (all GM ones anyway) they would revert to fuel demand governed mechanically. (airflow, metering rods, vacuum, etc.)
Although a TBI MIGHT be better than a carb, the inherent problems with a carb, and its MAJOR problem, is that fuel is mixed with air way too far before it reaches the chamber. Here, TBI and carbs are the same. The air/fuel mix has much further to travel, (plus it has bends and such)and the fuel more time to drop out of "suspension". Port injection solves this, by mixing it just before the cylinder.
I am in no means an expert in this field, but I am paying as much attention as possible, since I can foresee myself doing the TPI swap.
<hr></blockquote>
Yep, it's what the computer determines according to the air that is measured. And the bottom line to the whole topic is engine efficiency. TBI raised the effiency from the carbs, but does have that setup of having all the distance to travel and the port setups are even more effiecient due to cutting the travel out of the equation. Though I do have one argument though but it's not based in a lot of research. With my 14 year old, TBI, 145,000 mile 4x4 rig; I get better gas mileage than some of these newer rigs with better aerodynamics and more efficient engines. Now before I get flamed, I've just read the manufacturer's data sheets on the car lots and know that the MPG ratings can be off, it's just a general average. Maybe I ought to look into this further.
Bubba Ray Boudreaux,
Leader of the Advance Party for
the CSA revolution in the PRK!
<a target="_blank" href=http://www.handguncontrolinc.com>www.handguncontrolinc.com</a>
Actually, I think it could be simplified, in that EFI adds fuel based on what a computer determines. Even with a computer carb (all GM ones anyway) they would revert to fuel demand governed mechanically. (airflow, metering rods, vacuum, etc.)
Although a TBI MIGHT be better than a carb, the inherent problems with a carb, and its MAJOR problem, is that fuel is mixed with air way too far before it reaches the chamber. Here, TBI and carbs are the same. The air/fuel mix has much further to travel, (plus it has bends and such)and the fuel more time to drop out of "suspension". Port injection solves this, by mixing it just before the cylinder.
I am in no means an expert in this field, but I am paying as much attention as possible, since I can foresee myself doing the TPI swap.
<hr></blockquote>
Yep, it's what the computer determines according to the air that is measured. And the bottom line to the whole topic is engine efficiency. TBI raised the effiency from the carbs, but does have that setup of having all the distance to travel and the port setups are even more effiecient due to cutting the travel out of the equation. Though I do have one argument though but it's not based in a lot of research. With my 14 year old, TBI, 145,000 mile 4x4 rig; I get better gas mileage than some of these newer rigs with better aerodynamics and more efficient engines. Now before I get flamed, I've just read the manufacturer's data sheets on the car lots and know that the MPG ratings can be off, it's just a general average. Maybe I ought to look into this further.
Bubba Ray Boudreaux,
Leader of the Advance Party for
the CSA revolution in the PRK!
<a target="_blank" href=http://www.handguncontrolinc.com>www.handguncontrolinc.com</a>